david@ssc-vax.UUCP (David Norris) (01/06/84)
> Randolph Fritz: > So, is a man who does only the Christian good and yet does not > believe damned? No. You can't do "Christian" good without being a "Christian". You can do good which is the same good a Christian might do. But the motives are different. The difference is internal, not external. -- David Norris -- uw-beaver!ssc-vax!david
mat@hou5d.UUCP (M Terribile) (01/08/84)
> No. You can't do "Christian" good without being a "Christian". > You can do good which is the same good a Christian might do. But the > motives are different. The difference is internal, not external. > -- David Norris ``Intolerance, ma'am, is a state No tolerant man can tolerate'' -P. McGinley Leaving aside questions about Goedel here, let me ask a question: Is it wrong to do good not in the name of {Christ, Allah, Y H W H, ...}. If it is, are you saying that (1) this *apparent good* did not come from {...} and is therefore evil? (The Inquisition mentality) (2) that the apparent good is indeed good and comes from {...} but is of no credit to the person who does it? What of the individual who knows this and does good for its own sake without concern about himself and without seeking reward. Aren't Christians supposed to love God because He is *deserving* and NOT out of fear of punishment? Such fear evidently holds little weight; at least two respected contributors have said that if they believed in {...} they would not worship even at the doors of Hell. Isn't the same desire to do good for no particular reward at work? (3) that not believing in {...} and worshiping is so heinous a crime that {...} could never forgive the weakness of this human pride *no matter WHAT good intentions* an individual has? There is a story in one of the Gospels. As usual, I will ask you NOT to ask me which one, or where it is ... one of these days I will get my little library sorted out. In the mean time: A group of the apostles run to Jesus with alarming news. They have seen someone who wasn't one of them preaching and doing miraculous works in Jesus' name. ``Master, you must go and put a stop to this!!'' they clamor. But Jesus rebukes them, telling them that they do not have exclusive right to do good and to tell the good news in the name of Jesus. I really wish that this had been heard and accepted over the past 1900 -- odd years. We might have been spared much of the strife that Europe was subjected to. One other thought. The Bible, both Jewish and New Testament, is largely devoted to chronicaling man's mistakes and God's response to them. The Sacrifice of Jesus is the greatest act of mercy. It is not a non-response, nor is it a rebuke. It is a sacrifice and a gift beyond all others. Even if you DON'T accept Jesus as resurrected and living, consider the size of the human sacrifice. Please convince yourself that we MUST NOT allow that sacrifice to be meaningless. This aside, I am in fairly firm agreement with David N. in his responses to Tim's angry position. I am not quite so silling to write Tim off among the damned, but that is because I think he is fixating on the evil in this world and on the suffering that follows. And because I fear to judge. Too many of my own beliefs, actions, positions, etc, are in constant question, with no satisfactory answers forthcoming. Mark Terribile hou5d!mat